Transformation of Privacy in the Age of Social Media

Fast spread of social media usage has lead many complaints about the vanishing of privacy. Many people share their private lives and secrets without seeing any problematic side to it. Where we eat our lunch, which restaurant we preferred for it, which hour we woke up, which political leaders we like and hate, whether we started a new relationship with someone or not… All of them are shared and declared by ourselves in social media platforms, even with a high enthusiasm. Right?

Some of the people view this as a proof for lack of privacy. Even some claims that there is no privacy at all. However, the issue is much more than black and white. We need a deeper understanding upon what is going on with ourlives after the appearance of the social media. Yes, companies and governments have a crucial appetite for detecting and using our data in social media platforms. Nobody can deny this significant fact. But, the statement of the privacy that is done is beyond this issue. If people really have given up their privacy, we need to understand why that is so.

Actually, we cannot directly say that privacy is not important anymore for people in the social media age. Rather, the notion of privacy has been transforming, as always been throughout the history. Even if the social media is a new phenomenon for humankind, being private is an essential desire for every human being. Even the social media celebrities and phenomenon would not say that I do not possess a private life. Nevertheless, through the appearance of social media, the desire for having influence over other people has been triggered. Yes, it has always been a fact within ourselves. However, the degree can be variable, meaning that some may have less, some may have more. But, it has always existed. We want to tweet and show how much we follow the trends, how much we have knowledge, how cool of an individual we are. Right? We are not tweeting for the sake of being a modern Jesus.

If ancient Greek philosopher, Aristotle, had a chance to see the social media age, he would say: “All men by nature require to influence” rather than saying “All men by nature require to know”.

People just want to influence others and wants so be seen as cool. Why would not they want that, while others are doing that? But, there is one more aspect of it. How this process of sharing and engagement influence the people themselves while they actually want to influence others? At this point, the term of the most citated French sociologist Foucault explain the situation: “technology of self”. As Ernst Buchberger from the University of Vienna says:

“Technologies of the self’ are methods employed by people resulting in how they will be perceived as ‘selves’ by ‘others’ and them’selves”.

People tweet, share texts, and images to pretend to be the person in their imaginations. And it changes in every other social media platform. In some platforms, you have to be perceived as wicked, in some you have to be perceived as sincere and emphatic. The hegemonic demography of each platform and its general usage settings determine them. Namely, the others: everybody, except you. Therefore, you entered in the infinite process of being shaped by the perception of others. As Scottish philosopher, George Berkeley thinks; your existence is determined by the perception of the others. Without their perception, you have no existence in social media platforms. Efforts for being influential and active are all coming from this reality.

So, do all of these directly mean that people do not care about their privacy anymore? Or, is there a transformation of the notion of privacy because of the insisting demands of the age of social media? I think, the second one has more explanatory power.

People’s desire for being influential and cool is stirred up by the demanding structure of the social media platforms. In everyday, they need to shape their identities and digital-selves for still being perceived and influential. Yes, they know that social media platforms are really disrespectful towards the protection of their data. And governments try every method to get these data. However, it does not mean that they do not care privacy. As it has been said above, the desire for being influential and having a cool profile in social media platforms cast shadow on their privacy concerns. Addition to that, the spirit of the time does not require strictly protected data of people, unlike in the middle-ages or ancient times. (If they were able to access more public opportunities like the social media offers us, there was no guarantee that they would not benefit from that.)

Yes, we are still private in the digital age, even if our data are not appropriately protected by governments or social media platforms themselves. As have been said, the reflection of our digital selves in these platforms do not directly reflect our authentic selves. We are just trying to be the one who is perceived as cool persona in these digital public spheres. That the government knowing where I went to get one kilogram of tomatoes, does not annihilate all of my privacy. It might challenge in some cases, but even in these cases, it does not mean that I do not care about my privacy.

Our privacies are not common properties. At least, we still agree on the point that we do not wish to be so. Although governments use our social media foot-prints, like in a ‘virtual panopticon’, majority of these data is merely deliberate productions of ourselves that are created by ourselves, for being perceived as the persona that we want to be seem so.